• Deting Xue, Qiang Zheng, Hang Li, Shengjun Qian, Bo Zhang, and Zhijun Pan.
• Department of Orthopaedics, Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China.
• Int Orthop. 2010 Dec 1; 34 (8): 1307-13.

AbstractThe choice between reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of open and closed tibial fractures is an ongoing controversy. We carried out a comprehensive search strategy. Six eligible randomised controlled trials were included. Three reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted outcome data. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.0. The results showed lower risks of tibial fracture nonunion and implant failures with reamed nails compared to unreamed nails in closed tibial fractures [relative risk (RR): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.89, P = 0.008 for nonunion and RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.22-0.56, P < 0.0001 for implant failures], but no statistical differences in risk reduction of malunion, compartment syndrome, embolism and infection. Our results suggested no statistical differences in risk reduction of all the complications evaluated between reamed and unreamed nails in open tibial fractures. In conclusion, our study recommended reamed nails for the treatment of closed tibial fractures. But the choice for open tibial fractures remains uncertain.

19 keywords...

hide…